Keynote ToruTakeuchi

Chapter
1: Composition and history of Buckling‐restrained Braces
BUCKLING-RESTRAINED BRACE
HISTORY, DESIGN and APPLICATIONS
Toru Takeuchi, Akira Wada

Ryota Matsui, Ben Sitler, Pao-Chun Lin,
Fatih Sutcu, Hiroyasu Sakata, Zhe Qu
1
1 Buckling‐restrained Braces and Applications
Chapter 1: Composition and history of Buckling‐restrained Braces
1.1 Composition of
buckling‐restrained Braces (BRB)
Concept of Buckling-restrained Brace

Mortar
Appearance of typical BRB Types of restrainer
2
Restrainer
Core plate
Clearance and eccentricity
600 Development of
400 higher buckling mode
Axial force (kN)
200
0
-200
-400
-600
-40 -20 0 20 40
Axial deformation (mm)
Hysteresis of well‐designed BRB
3
1.2 History of Development
1972: Takeda et al. tried to improve the post-buckling behaviour of
H-section braces by encasing the steel section in reinforced
concrete. However, because no debonding mechanism was
provided, the restrainer received a significant compressive
force, cracked and ultimately experienced overall buckling.
1979: Motizuki et al. proposed introducing a debonding layer
between the core plate and reinforced concrete restrainer.
However, the system tended to buckle at the unrestrained core
extension
1988: The first practical buckling-restrained brace was achieved by
Saeki, Wada, et al. employed rectangular steel tubes with in-
filled mortar for the restrainer, and determined the optimal
debonding material specifications to obtain stable and
symmetric hysteresis behaviour.
4
1.2 History of Development
The first application of Buckling‐restrained Brace (Unbonded Brace, 1987)
BRB experiment 1987
Nippon Steel Headquarter No.2 (Tokyo) BRB installation
M Fujimoto, A Wada, E Saeki, T Takeuchi, A Watanabe: Development of Unbonded Braces, Quarterly Column,
No.115, pp.91‐96, 1990.1
5
Plant & Environmental Sciences, UC Davis Bennett Federal Building
Retrofit/ Salt Lake City
Early US applications in 2000’s
6
1.3 BRB TYPES (Mortar in‐filled type)
Restrainer
Restrainer
Core Plate
Restrainer
Core Plate
Connection Spacer
Slit
7
1.3 BRB TYPES (Dry type)
Restrainer Tube
Pin End Restrainer Tube Core Tube
Solid End Core Tube

Restrainer Tube
Bolt End Restrainer Tube
Core Tube
Core Tube
Unbonded Sheet
Restrainer
Bolt
Core Restrainer Bolt
Plate
Core Plate
Core Plate
Slit
8
Chapter 2: Restrainer Design and Clearances
Quality Requirement for
Hysteresis models
Inappropriate Plastic strain
clearance concentration
Local buckling Local bulging

Uneven stiffness
Uneven Uneven Local bulging Degradation
strength strength in compression side
Bulging-induced failure
Tearing
Degradation
in compression side Fracture
Slack
(pin connection)
Buckling
Buckling-induced failure
9
2.1 Restrainer Design
Global Stability, Higher Mode Connection

Connections
Restrainer including: Buckling Strength
Restrainer End
Fatigue Fracture
BRB Stability and Strength
1.Restrainer successfully suppresses core first‐mode buckling (Chapter 2)

2.Debonding mechanism decouples axial demands and allows for Poisson effects (Chapter 2)
3.Restrainer wall bulging due to higher mode buckling is suppressed (Chapter 3)
4.Global out‐of‐plane stability is ensured, including connection (Chapter 4)
5.Low‐cycle fatigue capacity is sufficient for expected demands (Chapter 5)
10
N crE  ac
ac  yc  E
N cr  N cu
N cu ac N cu  a  2s  e 
M  N cu (ac  yc ) 
B
  M B
y
1  N cu N crB 1  N cu N crB
a: Fabrication tolerances of core and/or brace
s：Clearance or thickness of debonding material (per face)
e：Eccentricity of the axial force
MBy：flexural strength of the restrainer
Ncu= da Ny：core yield force amplified by overstrength and strain hardening
da =1.4~1.5  2 EI B
NBcr ：Euler buckling strength of the restrainer, given by: N cr 
B
lB 2
Where initial imperfections ec/lB ≤ 1/500, a relatively slender restrainer
with lB/Dr > 20 and with an overall safety factor of eα ≥ 1.5;
 2 EI B
N crB  2
 e  N cu
lB
11
Chapter 3: Local Bulging Failure
3.1 Failure Caused by High Mode Buckling
in‐plane local bulging failure
out‐of‐plane local bulging failure
(Tokyo Institute of Technology)
(National Center for Research on Earthquake Engineering)
12
Tension
axial force
section s‐s
srs
Compression
core strain
Dr
Bc Bc Br
s
srs
steel core mortar debonding steel

Bc srw Br layer tube wall
w w
tc
srw
s tc Dr
section w‐w
13
3.1 Failure Caused by High Mode Buckling Compression is initially applied
Tension
Flexural buckling waves form in both the in‐plane and out‐
axial force
of‐plane directions
section s‐s
Compression
core strain
s
N N
w w
s
N N
section w‐w
14
3.1 Failure Caused by High Mode Buckling Maximum tensile strain is applied
Tension
Clearances increase because of the Poisson effect
axial force
γp =0.5, Poisson ratio of steel inelastic deformation
section s‐s srs+0.5γp Bc ɛt
Compression
core strain ɛt
s
srs
Bc srw
w w srw+0.5 γp tc ɛt
tc
s
section w‐w
15
Tension Compression reaches yield strength Ny
High mode buckling waves form and generating the
axial force
outward forces.
Ny section s‐s 2srs+γp Bc ɛt
outward force
Compression
core strain
Bc
s
Ny Ny
lp,s
w w 2srw+ γp tc ɛt
tc outward force
s
Ny Ny
section w‐w lp,w
16
3.1 Failure Caused by High Mode Buckling Compression reaches maximum
Tension compressive capacity Ncu
High mode buckling wavelengths remain, the maximum
axial force
outwards are fully developed.
section s‐s 2srs+γp Bc ɛt
Ncu
Compression
core strain Pd,s
s
Ncu Ncu
lp,s
w w 2srw+ γp tc ɛt
Pd,w Pd,w
s
Ncu Ncu
Pd,w Pd,w
section w‐w lp,w
17
Tension
Local bulging failure when restrainer is
axial force
too weak in sustaining outward forces
section s‐s
Ncu
Compression
core strain
in‐plane bulging
s
out‐of‐ in‐plane local bulging failure
plane
w w
bulging
section w‐w out‐of‐plane local bulging failure
18
3.2 Estimation on Outward Force (demand)
Apply moment equilibrium condition on the free body, 0.5Pd,s
In‐plane outward force Pd,s
0.5lp,s
Bc
Ncu
Ncu
4Ncu  2 srs  ν pBc εt  2srs+γp Bc ɛt
Pd ,s 
l p ,s 0.5Pd,s
Out‐of‐plane outward force Pd,w 0.5Pd,w
0.5lp,w
tc Ncu
4Ncu  2 srw  ν pt c εt  Ncu

Pd ,w  2srw+ γp tc ɛt
lp ,w
0.5Pd,w
19
3.4 Estimation on Steel Tube Resistance (capacity) t
out‐of‐plane bulging failure δw
x x
A D
b
B
Pc,w
Bc Br
w w
B’
b
A’ a D’
section t‐t t δw
2x
Pc,w
D
A B
Bc
Bc D’
B’ section w‐w
A’ 3‐D view External work = Pc,wδw
20
Chapter 3: Local Bulging Failure small deformation curvature
3.4 Estimation on Steel Tube Resistance A D
Yield lines AD and A’D’ ignored
Yield line patterns residual stress at tube corners
A D A D A D A D
B
B B B
B’ B’ B’
B’ 45。
α 45。 α
A’ D’ A’ D’ A’ D’ A’ D’
Condition 1 Condition 2 Condition 3 Condition 4
(Yoshida et al. 2010) (Lin et al. 2010)
Internal energy: E9 Internal energy: E9 Internal energy: E5 Internal energy: E5
(9 yield lines) (9 yield lines) (5 yield lines) (5 yield lines)
α: minimizing E9 α = 45° α: minimizing E5 α = 45°
4 2 2  Bc Br 2
Pc ,w  t r2σry 4  2 Bc Br 2 Pc ,w  t r2σry Pc ,w  t r σry
1  Bc Br  Pc ,w  t r σry 1  Bc Br  1  Bc Br
1  Bc Br
4 4  2t c Dr 2 2 2  tc Dr 2
Pc ,s  t r2σry Pc ,s  t r σry Pc ,s  t r2σry Pc ,s  t r σry
1  t c Dr  1  t c Dr 1  t c Dr  1  tc Dr
(resistance factor) (resistance factor) (resistance factor) (resistance factor)
21
3.5 Test Results and Evaluations example: Conservative:
bulging is in expectation but did not occur in test
Experimental resistance factor ●
resistance factor
4Ncu ,exp  2 srw  ν pt c εt  ×▲ Appropriate:
bulging occurred in test and was in expectation
out‐of‐plane: 2
l tσ
p ,w r ry ×▲ Dangerous:
4Ncu ,exp  2 srs  ν pBc εt  ● bulging occurred in test but was not in expectation
in‐plane: Appropriate:
lp ,st r2σry Bc/Br or tc/Dr
bulging did not occur in test and was not in expectation
14
● 15 specimens without bulging
12 × 14 out‐of‐plane bulged specimens
▲ 5 in‐plane in‐plane bulged specimens
10
resistance factor
Condition 2
(9 dangerous estimation)
8 Condition 1
(9 dangerous estimation)
6
4
Condition 4
2 (recommended)
Condition 3
(over‐conservative)
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Bc/Br or tc/Dr
22
3.5 Test Results and Evaluations out‐of‐plane bulging
Proposed design method: Bc
tc
4Ncu  2srw  ν ptc εt 
Br
Pd ,w  Br  Bc    0.85
DCRw    1.0 Dr
Pc ,w  2Br  Bc  tr2σry lp ,w
Pd ,s  Dr  tc  4Ncu  2srs  ν pBc εt  in‐plane bulging
DCRs     1.0 Bc tc
Pc ,s  2Dr  tc  tr2σry lp ,s  0.85 Dr
Br
14
● 15 specimens without bulging
12 × 14 out‐of‐plane bulged specimens
▲ 5 in‐plane in‐plane bulged specimens
10
resistance factor
8 7.7
2
0.85
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Bc/Br or tc/Dr
23
3.6 Required Mortar Strength for Local Pressure
contact surface
Pd,w
Pd ,w
 fc' lc
lc Bc
steel core
Bc restrainer
3.7 Local Bulging Criteria for Circular Restrainer
Pd ,s  Br  2tr  4Ncu  2srs  ν pBc εt 

DCRsc     1.0
Pc ,s  cmtm  tc  πtr Br σry lp , s
24
Chapter 4: Connection Design and Global Stability
4.2 Design Concepts
The AIJ Recommendations provide rigorous evaluation methods for BRB connection
out‐of‐plane buckling. Two concepts below are presented:
JEIB Connection JEIB > EIB KRg Connection

zone  L0 zone
Gusset plate Restrainer-end
Moment transfer Bending zone
capacity is lost at the moment
end of restrainer transfer
Restrained
zone Plastic Restrained
EIB =Plastic lB L0 EIB zone zone
zone
Restrainer-end
zone
JEIB Connection JEIB > EIB Connection

zone  L0 KRg zone
1: Cantilevered gusset 2: Restrainer end continuity
AIJ (2009) Recommendations for stability design of steel structures. Architectural Institute of Japan.
25
BRB configurations
Type A Type B Type C

(a) low stiffness (b) high stiffness Not rotationally
(US/NZ detailes) (JP details) braced
(a) One-way (b) Chevron

BRB configurations in frame
26
Stability assessment
Tsai and Nakamura’s proposal (2002) Koetaka and Inoue’s proposal (2008)
L0 (1  2 N  )l
r  N cr   KR
ic (l  d   N  l )( d   N  l )
* *
 2 (1  2 )rJ EI B 1  1   2
N cr  N cr   KR
(2 L0 )2 (1  1 )   2 L0
27
Toru Takeuchi, Tokyo Institute of Technology
Hikino and Okazaki’s proposal (2013)
K R L1 K R 1  2  d * 1  1  2
N cr      KR
L1 L1  L2  l  d * 1  (1  1 )  2 L0
Takeuchi’s proposal (2013)
  Rg
( M pr  M 0r ) ar  N crr  2 (1  2 ) J EI B K Rg  L0
N lim1   N cu N 
r
 
2  Rg

( M pr  M 0r ) ( ar N crB )  1 cr
(2 L0 )2 
 Rg  24 /   J EI B
2 L0   Rg  24 /  2
r  
ic (1  2 )  Rg
Lin yielding
Dneck
point of rotation
a) mortar‐filled BRB
Lin
b) steel tube‐in‐tube BRB
28
Takeuchi’s proposal (cont’d)
In case of plastic hinges produced at joint ends

(1  2 ) M pg  M 0r    M pr  M 0r   ar
N lim 2     N cu
(1  2 ) M p  M 0    M p  M 0   ( ar N cr )  1
g r r r B
 
Stable Unstable
29
4.6 In‐plane pinching
horizontal stiffener
vertical
stiffener
(a) Frame pinching (b) Frame opening

Expected Failure Recommended Proposal
30
Chapter 5: Cumulative Deformation Capacity until Fracture
Cumulative energy‐dissipation capacity
(a) Ordinary Tube Brace Local Buckling Mechanism
Plastic stress concentration

(b) Incomplete Buckling-restrained Brace
Expected Plastic Zone
Friction
(c) Complete Buckling-restrained Brace Mild local buckling and averaged
strain distribution along plastic zone
Plastic Zone
Local buckling distribution until fracture
31
BRB Fatigue Performance under Cyclic Loading
100 Steel material fatigue
Exp. Data5) performance4)
LY100
Strain Ampilitude Δεeq (%)
Steel material fatigue
10 performance4) SS400
BRB fatigue
6),7) LY235
1 performance
Manson‐Coffin
Fatigue Formula
0.1
Plastic Elastic  t  C1 N f m  C2 N f m
1 2
region region
0.0
BRB < Steel Material
11 10 100 100 1000 10000
0 0 0
Cycle Number Nf
4) Saeki, E et al. 1995. A Study on Low Cycle Fatigue Characteristics of Low Yield Strength Steel, J. Struct. Constr. Eng., AIJ, No. 472, 139‐147
5) Nakamura, H., Takeuchi, T., et al. 2000. Fatigue Properties of Practical Scale Unbonded Braces, Nippon Steel Technical Report, Nippon Steel
Corporation, No. 82, 51‐57
6) Takeuchi, T. et al. 2008. A. Estimation of Cumulative Deformation Capacity of Buckling Restrained Braces, J. Struct. Eng., ASCE, Vol. 134, No.
5, 822‐831
7) Takeuchi, T. et al. 2006. Cumulative Deformation Capacity and Damage Evaluation for Elasto‐plastic Dampers at Beam Ends, J. Struct. Constr.
Eng., AIJ, No. 600, 115‐122
32
Fatigue Performance of BRB
using Plastic Strain Concentration Mechanism
100
s0=0mm Experiment s0=1mm,
(Steel material) tc=25mm5)
Strain amplitude Δεn (%)
Experiment s0=2mm,
10 s0=1.0mm, tc=25mm tc=12mm9)
s0=2.0mm, tc=12mm
s0=2.0mm, tc=25mm
0.1 Fatigue performance of BRB
decreases as clearance
s0=5.0mm, tc=25mm SN400B between core plate and
0.01 restrainer increases
1 10 100 1000 10000
Fracture cycle Nf
5) Nakamura, H., Takeuchi, T., et al. 2000. Fatigue Properties of Practical Scale Unbonded Braces, Nippon Steel Technical Report, Nippon Steel
Corporation, No. 82, 51‐57
9) Takeuchi, T., Ohyama, T., and Ishihara, T. 2010. Cumulative Cyclic Deformation Capacity of High Strength Steel Frames with Energy
Dissipation Braces (Part 1), Journal of Structural and Constructional Engineering, Architectural Institute of Japan, Vol. 75, No. 655, 1671‐1679
(in Japanese)
33
Estimation by Miner’s Method
F re q u en cy N (cyc les)
fi
120
100
80
60
40
20
10
5
0
0.525
1.225
1.925
2.625
3.325
6.125
6.825
7.525
8.225
8.925
11.73
12.43
4.025
4.725
5.425
9.625
10.32
11.02
S tr a in A m p litu d e   (% )
i
Strain Amp. Δε (%) Strain Amplitude Frequency
100
Constant Amp.
10
Gradually
1 Increasing
Fatigue
0.1 εe=0.5･N f-0.14 Shaking
Table
0.01
0 0.5 1(Theory) 1.5 2
εp=54.0･N f-0.71
Damage Index
0.001
1 10 100 1000 10 4 10 5 10 6 Accuracy by Miner’s Method
Failure Cycles N f (cycles)
Fatigue Curve under Constant Amplitude
34
Chapter 6: Performance Test Specification for BRB
6.1 Test Configurations
1) Uniaxial test
Single Brace test
Single Brace test

with rotational deformation
(ANSI/AISC 341-05)
35
2) Inclined test
Inclined layout
with column
Inclined layout
with initial
out-of-plane drift
36
3) In‐frame test
37
Example BRB testing protocol
(a) ANSI/AISC 341-05 and US practice
Cycle Inelastic Deformation Cumulative strain Cumulative
(Story drift angle) ( bm = 4 by ) ( by =0.25%) Inelastic strain
 by ×2 =2×4× by -  by ) =0 by =2×4×0.25=2% =2×4×0=0%
0.5 bm ×2 =2×4× by -  by ) =8 by =2×4×0.5=4% =2×4×0.25=2%
1.0 bm ×2 =2×4× by -  by ) =24 by =2×4×1.0=8% =2×4×0.75=6%
1.5 bm ×2 =2×4× by -  by ) =40 by =2×4×1.5=12% =2×4×1.25=10%
.0 bm ×2 =2×4× by -  by ) =56 by =2×4×2.0=16% =2×4×1.75=14%
1.5 bm ×4 =4×4× by -  by ) =80 by =4×4×1.5=24% =4×4×1.25=20%
(1.5 bm until fracture)
Total =208 by =56% =52%
(b) BCJ and Japanese practice

Cycle Inelastic Deformation Cumulative strain Cumulative
(Plastic length strain) ( by =0.25%) ( by =0.25%) Inelastic strain
 by ×3 =3×4× by -  by ) =0 by =3×4×0.25=3% =3×4×0=0%
0.5%×3 =3×4× by -  by ) =8 by =3×4×0.5=6% =3×4×0.25=3%
1.0% ×3 =3×4× by -  by ) =36 by =3×4×1.0=12% =3×4×0.75=9%
.0% ×3 =3×4× by -  by ) =84 by =3×4×2.0=24% =3×4×1.75=21%
 ×3 =3×4× by -  by ) =132 by =3×4×3.0=36% =3×4×2.75=33%
(3.0% until fracture)
Total =264 by =81% =66%
38
6.4 Post Earthquake Inspection
Koriyama Big-Eye, a 24-story, 133m building complete in 1998 in Fukushima experienced
Tohku Earthquake 2011 at 234km from epicenter. The cumulative deformation
measurements and earthquake record were used to calibrate a finite element model,
indicated a peak ductility demand of µ ≈ 4 and a cumulative plastic strain of ∑εp ≈ 20%
(∑δp/δy ≈ 100) in the Y direction, still 6% of their capacity.
cumulative def.
meter
Fukushima Koriyama Big-Eye max def. meter

Inaba Y, Morimoto S, Tsuruta S, Takeuchi T, Matsui R. Damage record of buckling restrained braces that received actual ground
motion. AIJ Kanto Branch Research Report Collection 2017
39
Chapter 7.1: Damage Tolerant Concept
7.1.1 Damage Tolerant Concepts
Damage Tolerant Structure
Earthquake Ground Motion and Seismic Design in Japan
Wada A, Connor J, Kawai H, Iwata M, Watanabe A: Damage Tolerant Structure, ATC-15-4, Proc. 5th
US-Japan WS on the Imprement of Building Structural Design and Construction Practices, 1992.9
40
Strain Distribution along the beam System of Main Structure and Damper
BRB Energy BRB Energy
Main Frame
Shear
Dissipation Shear Dissipation
Damage Zone
Force Zone Force Zone
Max Response Max Response
Main Frame
(High-strength
Steel)
Main Frame
(Normal Steel)
BRB BRB
0.00125 0.005 0.01 Story Drift 0.00125 0.01 Story Drift

(1/800) (1/200) (1/100) (1/800) (1/100)
Angle Angle
(a) Ordinary Concept (b) Damage Tolerant Concept
Shear force-Story Drift Relationship of Damage Tolerant Structure
41
Triton Square Project

42
Following Damage Tolerant Projects
Grand Tokyo North Tower Election of Large BRBF
43
Grid-skin structures with BRBs
BRB is suitable for Grid-skin structures
Ductile elements, Less bending loss,

Free internal space, Design with facades
44 Toru Takeuchi Tokyo Tech

Energy-dissipation Skins with Solar Cells
2. Disaster Prevention and Environmental Sustainability
Cg南側
45 Toru Takeuchi Tokyo Tech

Energy-dissipation Skins with Solar Cells
2. Disaster Prevention and Environmental Sustainability
Main Frame
Spiral Layout of Energy-dissipation
Fuses around Perimeter zones
Open Space
Energy Dissipation Brace
Solar-panel Envelope Structure

Flexible and Lightweight structure over the main frame
46
Chapter 7.3: Seismic retrofit with BRBs
Midorigaoka-1st Building Retrofit concept
47
800 800
600 600
400 400
200 200
(kN)
(kN)
0 0
-200 -200
-400 -400
-600 Experiment -600 Experiment
Calculation Calculation
-800 -800
-30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
(mm) (mm)
(a) Before retrofit (b) After Retrofit
Reduced mock-up test for 2nd floor frame
48
Maximum story drift obtained by time‐history analyses
Detail for the connections between frame and BRB
49
Environmental effect of outer skins
summer spring/fall winter

50
Perimeter work process
Carbon fiber reinforcement BRB Attachment

51
52
Retrofit with Diagonal BRB Louver
(a) Exterior appearance (b) Interior view

Application for Seismic retrofit (Administer Build. Tokyo Tech)
Takeuchi T, Yasuda K, Iwata M: Seismic Retrofitting using Energy Dissipation Façades, ATC-SEI09
(San Francisco), 2009.12
53
7.4.1 BRB application on RC frame with elastic steel frame
54
A A
B B
C C
D D
E E
F F
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Typical RC school building in Turkey
55
160
Residual displacement
≈1/30 story drift
120
Inter‐story displacement (mm)
RC only
80
40
RC + BRB + SF
0 ≈1/3000 story drift
≈1/1000 story drift
RC + BRB
‐40
RC only
RC+BRB
RC+BRB+SF
‐80
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Time (sec)
56
Increment Dynamic Analyses curves
2 1.5
RC only (b) RC+CB+SF
(a)
RC+CB+SF
"First Mode" Apectral Acceleration SA
"First Mode" Spectral Acceleration SA
RC+BRB
RC+BRB+SF
target drift (1/150) RC+BRB+SF
1.5
1
(T1, 5%) (g)
(T1, 5%) (g)
0.5
0.5
0 0
0 0.00025 0.0005 0.00075 0.001
0.000 0.005 0.010 0.015 0.020 0.025
Maximum Residual Drift (rad)
Maximum inter‐story drift (rad)
57
Cyclic Loading Test for RC retrofit with BRB+SF

(Istanbul Technological University)
58
Chapter 7.6: Applications for truss and spatial structures
7.5.2 Types of Spatial Structure Applications
a) Truss structures Force
Limiting
Function
2
1.5
y
1
0.5
-0.5
-1
-1.5
△ △ △ △ △ △
Buckling BRB -2
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
軸歪み [%]
Response Control for Truss Structures
Devices
Device Layout Types for Response-controlled Truss Structures

59
Horizontal Acceleration
Vertical Acceleration
Horizontal Input
Seismic Response of Raised Roof
(R‐1) Roof with Dampers (R‐2) Base Isolated

Roof
(R‐3) Substructure with Dampers (R‐4) Entire Base Isolation

Device Layout for Response-controlled Roof Structures
60
Seismic retrofit of communication towers
61
Toyota Stadium
Vibration Control Brace (Deck) Deck
5.7 5.7
Horizontal Tie
Horizontal
108.3m
Brace
Thrust Brace
Main Arch
5.7 5.7
Vibration Control Brace

(Roof)
Shimokita Dome
62
7.5.3 Applications to Bridge Structures
BRBs
Seismic retrofit of steel arch bridge

with BRBs
Buckling‐restrained Braces
Retrofit of Hanshin highway bridge
Celik O, Bruneau M: Skewed Slab‐on‐Girder Steel

Bridge Superstructures with Bidirectional‐Ductile End Bridge girder with BRBs on RC peer
Diaphragms, ASCE Journal of Bridge Engineering,
Vol.16, No.2, pp.207‐218, 2011
63
Chapter 7.7: Spine frame concepts
7.6.2. Dual spine system
Elastic
BRB or Damper Brace
BRB or Damper
(a) Conventional BRB distribution (b) Dual spine concept
Taga K, Koto M, Tokuda Y, Tsuruta J, Wada A. Hints on how to design passive control structure whose
damper efficiency is enhanced, and practicality of this structure, Proc. Passive Control Symposium 2004,
105‐112, Tokyo Tech, 2004.11
64
Retrofit of Suzukake G3
Tokyo Tech 2010
Akira Wada, Qu Zhe et al.
Qu Z, Wada A, Motoyui S, Sakata H, Kishiki S: Pin-supported walls for enhancing the seismic
performance of building structures. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics 2012
65
7.6.4. Non-uplifting Hinged Spine Frame System (Material Research Building)
66
7.6.5. Comparison of Spine Frame Systems
(a) Conventional BRBF (b) Lift‐up Rocking Frame (c) Non‐uplifting Spine

(SD) (LU) Frame (NL)
Takeuchi T, Chen X, Matsui R. Seismic performance of controlled spine frames with energy‐dissipating
members, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol.115, 51‐65, 2015.11
67
5 5
0.8% rad. 0.05% rad.
4 (1/125) 4 (1/2000)
Shear
Damper 3 3
System
2 2
1 1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 0 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15
PT wire 5 5
0.8% rad. 0.05% rad.
4 (1/125) 4 (1/2000)
Lift-up
3 3
Spine
System 2 2
1 1
BRC 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 0 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15
5 5
0.8% rad. 0.05% rad.
4 (1/125) 4 (1/2000)
Non Lift-up
Spine 3 3
System
2 2
BRC BRC 1 1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 0 0.03 0.06 0.09 0.12 0.15
Max. Story Drift Angle (%) Residual Story Drift Angle (%)
68
7.6.7 Application Examples
Retrofit of Steel Frame with RC core wall spine
680 Folsom Street, SF, US
Janhunen B., Tipping S., Wolfe J., Mar T. Seismic Retrofit of a 1960s steel moment-frame
highrise using a pivoting spine, SEAOC 2013 Convention Proceedings
69
Damped Outrigger concept
BRBs
RC core
Wilshire Grand Tower, LA, US

Joseph LM, Gulec C, Schwaiger K Justin M: Wilshire Grand: Outrigger Designs and Details for a Highly
Seismic Site, International Journal of High‐Rise Buildings, Vol.5, Issue 1, 2016, pp.1‐12
70
Optimization Method
Response
Damper
Rat  Outrigger position
3.28Str 2 Rat 2  0.75Str (1  Rat ) Rat  0.57(1  Rat ) 2
 opt 
6.75Str 2 Rat 2  1.81Str (1  Rat ) Rat  0.63(1  Rat ) 2
Exclusive
Optimization 0.20 2  0.59  0.61 kb Rat , opt
Rat , opt  , c 
2.01 4 Str 2  Str (  2) 2 
d , opt
B.Huang, T.Takeuchi: Dynamic Response Evaluation of Damped-Outrigger Systems with Various

Heights, Earthquake Spectra, Vol.33, No.2, pp.665-685, 2017.5
71
The latest knowledge is overviewed in
Buckling-Restrained Braces and

Applications
T. Takeuchi and A. Wada, Japan Society of
Seismic Isolation, 2017
mail to contactjssi@jssi.or.jp
30-years from the first application, BRBs are still actively researched and
expanding applications. I am looking forward to further development in
the future.
72
Thank you very much for your kind attention
73

Keynote ToruTakeuchi

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Keynote ToruTakeuchi

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Chapter

Toru Takeuchi, Akira Wada

Concept of Buckling-restrained Brace

Appearance of typical BRB Types of restrainer

Solid End Core Tube

Local buckling Local bulging

Global Stability, Higher Mode Connection

1.Restrainer successfully suppresses core first‐mode buckling (Chapter 2)

steel core mortar debonding steel

4Ncu  2 srw  ν pt c εt  Ncu

Pd ,s  Br  2tr  4Ncu  2srs  ν pBc εt 

JEIB Connection JEIB > EIB KRg Connection

JEIB Connection JEIB > EIB Connection

Type A Type B Type C

(a) One-way (b) Chevron

In case of plastic hinges produced at joint ends

(a) Frame pinching (b) Frame opening

Plastic stress concentration

Local buckling distribution until fracture

Single Brace test

Single Brace test

(b) BCJ and Japanese practice

Fukushima Koriyama Big-Eye max def. meter

0.00125 0.005 0.01 Story Drift 0.00125 0.01 Story Drift

Triton Square Project

Grand Tokyo North Tower Election of Large BRBF

BRB is suitable for Grid-skin structures

Ductile elements, Less bending loss,

44 Toru Takeuchi Tokyo Tech

45 Toru Takeuchi Tokyo Tech

Energy Dissipation Brace

Solar-panel Envelope Structure

summer spring/fall winter

Perimeter work process

Carbon fiber reinforcement BRB Attachment

(a) Exterior appearance (b) Interior view

Typical RC school building in Turkey

Increment Dynamic Analyses curves

Cyclic Loading Test for RC retrofit with BRB+SF

Device Layout Types for Response-controlled Truss Structures

(R‐1) Roof with Dampers (R‐2) Base Isolated

(R‐3) Substructure with Dampers (R‐4) Entire Base Isolation

Seismic retrofit of communication towers

Vibration Control Brace

Seismic retrofit of steel arch bridge

Celik O, Bruneau M: Skewed Slab‐on‐Girder Steel

(a) Conventional BRBF (b) Lift‐up Rocking Frame (c) Non‐uplifting Spine

680 Folsom Street, SF, US

Wilshire Grand Tower, LA, US

B.Huang, T.Takeuchi: Dynamic Response Evaluation of Damped-Outrigger Systems with Various

The latest knowledge is overviewed in

Buckling-Restrained Braces and

Вам также может понравиться